The Last of Us - 6 Hour Movie

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I simply prefer a more open world when it comes to exploration. Bioshock Infinite isn't really linear, but it doesn't stray much from the same corridor style that Bioshock 1&2 used. Most of the "optional" paths are in plain site and are also quite short.

I understand the open world bit, I think - but the "plain sight" thing I don't quite follow.

I mean, in a game like Fallout 3 - most of the areas you can explore are "right there" when you come across them. Obviously, you have to actually come across them - and maybe that in itself is more enjoyable for you?

Bioshock Infinite had areas that weren't immediately apparent - but it's true that if you're an experienced gamer - they were hard to overlook, if you tried exploring everything.

That's just it though.. you do follow mostly straight paths in BI. Instead of being able to go off in any direction, you're mostly herded in one particular direction or another.

I don't really agree - though I see your point. The game is linear on the overall scale - that's true. But the actual levels felt reasonably open to me, and I had to pay attention to experience everything.

To me, it's not essential that I could potentially overlook areas. It's more important that I'm rewarded for my efforts to explore - and even though an area is reasonably obvious - the key is that exploring the area is rewarded with some unique or interesting content.

Obviously, being pushed to experience everything is not good for exploration, but that's not at all how I felt in BI. I think lots of players will miss a lot of the optional content.

But it's quite ok with me that we don't agree.

About as serious as a Chuck Norris film.

So no, not very serious. :)

Thought so ;)
 
I understand the open world bit, I think - but the "plain sight" thing I don't quite follow.

I mean, in a game like Fallout 3 - most of the areas you can explore are "right there" when you come across them. Obviously, you have to actually come across them - and maybe that in itself is more enjoyable for you?

Bioshock Infinite had areas that weren't immediately apparent - but it's true that if you're an experienced gamer - they were hard to overlook, if you tried exploring everything.

I guess what I mean is that there is a lot less choice overall. For instance, you would usually emerge into an open area (typically a sort of smallish town square), and you would see almost immediately that there was, at the most, 2 or 3 different corridor-style paths you could then take.

Then of course there were some houses and stores you could enter along the way that would typically include some trash cans and cash registers for you to pilfer, and perhaps a safe. If you were lucky, there would even be another room upstairs or downstairs which would be similar.

It's not comparable to an open-world game where you can scan the horizon and perhaps see a dozen different things that might interest you and then be able to approach them from any direction you like.

I think we get each other's gists by now though.


I don't really agree - though I see your point. The game is linear on the overall scale - that's true. But the actual levels felt reasonably open to me, and I had to pay attention to experience everything.

To me, it's not essential that I could potentially overlook areas. It's more important that I'm rewarded for my efforts to explore - and even though an area is reasonably obvious - the key is that exploring the area is rewarded with some unique or interesting content.

Obviously, being pushed to experience everything is not good for exploration, but that's not at all how I felt in BI. I think lots of players will miss a lot of the optional content.

But it's quite ok with me that we don't agree.

Fair enough. Although I don't see a lot of players missing much optional content unless they're trying to rush through the game.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,129
Location
Florida, US
I guess what I mean is that there is a lot less choice overall. For instance, you would usually emerge into an open area (typically a sort of smallish town square), and you would see almost immediately that there was, at the most, 2 or 3 different corridor-style paths you could then take.

Then of course there were some houses and stores you could enter along the way that would typically include some trash cans and cash registers for you to pilfer, and perhaps a safe. If you were lucky, there would even be another room upstairs or downstairs which would be similar.

The trash cans and cash registers were boring :)

Nah, I'm talking about unique content - like the audio logs, the commentary by Elizabeth - which was context sensitive, art, the "gear", and so on. Every single room in that game felt like it was a place with a history and purpose - much more so than the generic areas you find in most freeform exploration games.

Again, to me, exploration isn't just about hidden areas - but about the actual exploration of what's there.

In a typical Bioware game, for instance, you follow a similar linear path - but you don't really get rewarded for exploring the areas. Most areas are very sparsely populated with content - and everything important is shoved right in your face.

BI had such a sense of place and such a marvellous level of detail - that I greatly enjoyed exploring all the areas - obvious or not.

It's not comparable to an open-world game where you can scan the horizon and perhaps see a dozen different things that might interest you and then be able to approach them from any direction you like.

It's true that it's not really freeform exploration. But freeform exploration is only good when you're actually rewarded for your efforts. Most freeform games don't do that very well. The best examples are PB games and a few TES games. Well, and some of the older RPGs - like Baldur's Gate.

I think we get each other's gists by now though.

More or less, sure.

Fair enough. Although I don't see a lot of players missing much optional content unless they're trying to rush through the game.

By my standards, most players DO seem to rush through games like Bioshock Infinite ;)
 
The trash cans and cash registers were boring :)

Nah, I'm talking about unique content - like the audio logs, the commentary by Elizabeth - which was context sensitive, art, the "gear", and so on. Every single room in that game felt like it was a place with a history and purpose - much more so than the generic areas you find in most freeform exploration games.

Again, to me, exploration isn't just about hidden areas - but about the actual exploration of what's there.

In a typical Bioware game, for instance, you follow a similar linear path - but you don't really get rewarded for exploring the areas. Most areas are very sparsely populated with content - and everything important is shoved right in your face.

BI had such a sense of place and such a marvellous level of detail - that I greatly enjoyed exploring all the areas - obvious or not.

You're talking about loot, art assets, etc. Yeah, it's great to have high-quality content, but I'm talking about the limits of the actual areas and the way you can traverse them. I understand what you're saying though, and I agree that it's part of the exploration.

And yeah.. BI was definitely much better than most Bioware games in that aspect. Their games since the the BG series have been terrible in regards to exploration. The only exception was DA: Origins + expansion which had a decent amount things you could find. Even then, that was only if you didn't abuse the Tab key. :)


It's true that it's not really freeform exploration. But freeform exploration is only good when you're actually rewarded for your efforts. Most freeform games don't do that very well. The best examples are PB games and a few TES games. Well, and some of the older RPGs - like Baldur's Gate.

Well to be honest, there aren't really a lot of true open-world games to begin with. But yeah… I was thinking mainly of TES and Gothic/Risen.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,129
Location
Florida, US
You're talking about loot, art assets, etc. Yeah, it's great to have high-quality content, but I'm talking about the limits of the actual areas and the way you can traverse them. I understand what you're saying though, and I agree that it's part of the exploration.

Yup - though by "art", I actually meant the paintings and stuff you find along the way.

Exploring the areas is definitely part of the exploration ;)

And yeah.. BI was definitely much better than most Bioware games in that aspect. Their games since the the BG series have been terrible in regards to exploration. The only exception was DA: Origins + expansion which had a decent amount things you could find. Even then, that was only if you didn't abuse the Tab key. :)

Agreed. I'm playing DA at the moment, and exploration is really limited. Ok, you do find lots of Codex entries - but it's just a pop-up and a bit of text.

I find the tab-key essential - and wouldn't dream of playing DA without it. Same goes for Baldur's Gate :)

Well to be honest, there aren't really a lot of true open-world games to begin with. But yeah… I was thinking mainly of TES and Gothic/Risen.

Not THAT many, but I tend to count games like Divinity, Goldbox series, Fallout, and so on. Some of those have OK exploration - but I find that almost all of them suffer from areas feeling generic.

Even in Gothic and Risen - most caves and areas feel very similar.

In games like SS2 and BI - I find that almost all the areas feel truly unique. Obviously, they're smaller and not freeform - but I'd rather have less unique content than a ton of generic content. It's a balance, really.

Skyrim is unique in the balance between a MASSIVE amount of content - and a staggering amount of unique "bits and pieces" - even if a lot of people apparently consider it very samey.

We're all different in that way, I suppose.
 
Exploring the areas is definitely part of the exploration ;)

Yes, and I'm talking about the actual exploration, while you're talking about what's discovered through it. Nothing wrong with that though, and I think we should probably allow the discussion to get back on topic. Perhaps a separate thread about exploration in games would be worthwhile.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,129
Location
Florida, US
Yes, and I'm talking about the actual exploration, while you're talking about what's discovered through it. Nothing wrong with that though, and I think we should probably allow the discussion to get back on topic. Perhaps a separate thread about exploration in games would be worthwhile.

No, I'm talking about exploring the areas - which, to me, is exploration.

You seem to be talking about finding areas to explore. Finding them is another kind of exploration - I suppose. But, to me, it all blends together.

Anyway, agreed - let's get back on topic.

If anyone wants to create a thread dedicated to this topic - I'll gladly participate.
 
No, I'm talking about exploring the areas - which, to me, is exploration.

You seem to be talking about finding areas to explore. Finding them is another kind of exploration - I suppose. But, to me, it all blends together.


I thought I was quite clear when I said..

I'm talking about the limits of the actual areas and the way you can traverse them.

But whatever. :)
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,129
Location
Florida, US
The lines are starting to blur and I'm beginning to think you two are the same person
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
1,397
Location
USA-Michigan
The lines are starting to blur and I'm beginning to think you two are the same person
Nope. Simply not possible. JDR's fairly normal, but DArt is far too screwy to be a sock. *There can be only one.*
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,535
Location
Illinois, USA
I'm going to try and play it at some point. I'm thinking about getting a PS3 when the PS4 comes out just so I can play a handful of PS3 games that I've missed over the years, like that one and Resistance and Uncharted.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2009
Messages
526
Location
Auckland, New Zealand
Back
Top Bottom